On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Doug LaRue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ** Reply to message from "Nicholas Wheeler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 25 > Apr 2008 13:23:25 -0400 > > > > Does the BSA pay for the costs associated with an audit? Or can they > > just arbitrarily come to any company suspected of using open source > > software(non-Microsoft), and audit them (thus costing the company a > > significant amount of money)? The timeline for a BSA audit seems like > > a long, painful process that doesn't apply to linux-only companies. > > The BSA has the legal contract with Microsoft to do this but it has little > power to do anything regarding open source. It is about businesses who > use Microsoft software. A Linux-only shop would just have to prove to > the judge that they don't run Windows or any Microsoft software and > could probably turn around and charge the BSA for court costs. > > Doug >
I once had a consulting client who got a summons from the BSA regarding unlicensed copies of Windows. The client suspected that it was the work of a disgruntled former employee. He just replied to the summons that he had run nothing but open source software since before the period covered by the summons(which was the truth) and they never heard from them again. I don't know if this is typical or not, but it seems that simply standing up to them before it gets to the BSA-on-doorstep stage in a case like this is fairly effective. Robert Donovan -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
